[ad_1]
Tom Sandoval has filed a lawsuit in opposition to his ex, Ariana Madix, claiming she gained entry to express movies of him and Rachel Leviss on his cellphone with out his permission.
In keeping with court docket paperwork obtained by ET, Sandoval, 40, claims Madix, 39, “obtained entry” to his “cellphone and reviewed photos, info, information, video and/or communications together with, however not restricted, to Facetime movies between Leviss and Sandoval with out Sandoval’s authorization or permission.” Sandoval additional claims in court docket paperwork filed Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court docket that Madix went so far as making copies of the video and shared them with “Leviss and third events.”
Us Weekly was first to report the story.
The video Madix discovered on Sandoval’s cellphone — whereas watching his band carry out at TomTom in Los Angeles and documented within the explosive season 10 finale of Vanderpump Guidelines — uncovered his affair with Leviss, which torpedoed his close to decade-long relationship with Madix. The saga rapidly grew to become often known as “Scandoval.”
The following fallout led to Leviss exiting the Bravo franchise and her submitting a revenge porn lawsuit in opposition to Sandoval and Madix, alleging revenge porn, eavesdropping, intentional infliction of emotional misery and invasion of privateness. Leviss claimed that intimate FaceTime calls, displaying her “in a state of undress and masturbating” with Sandoval, had been filmed with out her consent. Sandoval responded to the lawsuit, by way of his attorneys, saying that the movies had been created and shared consensually throughout their FaceTime calls. His attorneys additionally mentioned that Sandoval merely saved personal copies of movies that Leviss had willingly shared with him. Leviss later claimed that Sandoval recording her in a sexually compromising place with out her data, in impact, turned her “into an unwilling porn star.”
The lawsuit stays ongoing.
ET has reached out to Sandoval for remark.
In an announcement to ET, Madix’s lawyer, Jordan Susman, a accomplice at Nolan Heimann LLP, says, “It’s abhorrent that Tom Sandoval continues to torment Ms. Madix. From partaking in a bootleg affair that shattered her dwelling and stability, to months of emotional warfare and now this try to additional shirk private duty for the consequences his actions have had on her and her emotional wellbeing. Tom Sandoval is aware of full properly what kind of privileges he and Ms. Madix shared in regard to their private communication gadgets.”
Susman continued, “If he or his mistress had their means, it could be unlawful for somebody to find their partner or important different was having an affair. For Mr. Sandoval to go from begging Ms. Madix for forgiveness to blaming her for his wrongdoing speaks for itself. Even months after the New York Occasions branded Mr. Sandoval ‘essentially the most hated man in America,’ he has clearly realized nothing and believes it essential to proceed torturing Ms. Madix in a useless effort to rehabilitate his picture. Ms. Madix is assured {that a} jury will see by way of this newest ploy and dismiss his frivolous claims.”
In an announcement to ET, Leviss’ lawyer, Bryan J. Freedman, Esq, tells ET, “Tom Sandoval mustn’t have recorded Rachel with out her consent within the first place. He grossly invaded her privateness. However the Court docket’s dedication that Ariana’s conduct was unlawful, Tom’s try to deflect duty for his personal wrongdoing is tone deaf.”
Some solid members are already reacting to Sandoval’s lawsuit in opposition to Madix. Vanderpump Guidelines star Katie Maloney voiced her disgust in a few feedback she dropped in a Vanderpump Guidelines fan account that posted a headline to the lawsuit.
“Approved permission..fascinating alternative of phrases pal. In any case, you f***ing suck dude,” she commented. A fan replied to her, “@musickillskate surprise if he had ‘approved permission’ to display screen file the video within the first place riiiiiiiight,” to which Maloney responded with, “no he didn’t however he did share his cellphone cross code along with his accomplice on the time. Mans confused about how that bit works I suppose.”
RELATED CONTENT:
[ad_2]
Source link
